Shocked by the appearance of the game

I am one of those gamers who adored the gameplay and the depth of GC2, but who whished that the game had better graphics. Immersion is an important part of gaming for me, and the appearance of a game obviously can help a great deal to establish this immersion factor. Unfortunalety, the graphics of GC2 did not achieve much in this direction. Because of this, like many others I was thrilled by the news that there will actually be this next generation installment, which promised to change things usings modern methods.

I just now took my first look at GC3, and I have to say that I am more than a little suprised by its current looks. I don't want to (and can't) talk about deeper gameplay changes, but I can tell you what impression I had when I watched the first videos of it, and I am pretty convinced that even for a 4x game, the first impression is important: This game looks exactly like its predecessor! Yes, one can argue that this statement is of course nonsense, because there are some differences here and there, etc, etc. But overall, there is not really a step upwards concerning the appearance of this game noticable.

The planet maps are the same static images like in GC, they look like a board game from 1990, but not in any way like a user interface of a video game from 2014. How can this be? I am currently playing Imperium Galactica 2 on my phone (which achieves a nice immersion btw), where you can zoom in onto a planet (with a 3D model I might add) and build cities there. Not possible for GC 2014? And the star map does also not provide any significant changes either. Ships for example are still flying there zigzag routes (an absolute immersion killer). What, Really? I can not even imagine what the ideas of you guys where to rebuild the same game with the same looks 10 years later.

GC3 has been one of my most anticipated games lately, but frankly, at the moment my impression is that I do not know what this game actually adds to its predecessor, and I think there might not be a need to buy this directly after release. I could be that I will wait until the first good sale at steam.

there is not really a step upwards concerning the appearance of this game noticable.

You obviously haven't played CG2 in a while, because the difference in appearance is striking. Certainly, with it's heavy reliance on tiles and high level of abstraction for things like planetary improvements, it shows its strategy board-game roots; but for many people that's part of its charm.

** I'm sorry for using emotes (slap my wrists if you must) but feel its needed **

You beat me to posting something similar - Great post btw !!

I didn't want to be to critical but as I play/test the beta 1 version, my fear is this version will only appeal to the old die hard fans. As I am and hopefully will stay myself. But...

I, like you seem to be a tad surprised of the samey look of GalCiv III with the last outing - and as you have mentioned, other 4x games are achieving a greater graphical design. GalCiv III does appear stuck in the mid 2000 with blocky/plastic feel to most of its game design. But, the only plus I can see is the ability to animate parts of our ship designs - Gold badge awarded !!

GalCiv III hex system of movement is really lacking realism - Almost all other TB games use the more popular 8 sided 'compass' movement/logistical system. I mean...we drive/walk/fly/sleep using that 'natural' directional system and it is soooo easily 'coded'.

Having no tactical warfare system is suicidal. Today in the gaming world, tactical passages of play is a must...GalCiv used to have it and was one of the strongest elements to GalCiv II. *please line up your 'New' design team and give them their last cigarette*

Allot of the statistical presentation of information seems to be aimed at...children who just about handle percentages !!!!

GalCiv III hex system of movement is really lacking realism - Almost all other TB games use the more popular 8 sided 'compass' movement/logistical system. I mean...we drive/walk/fly/sleep using that 'natural' directional system and it is soooo easily 'coded'.

Last i used a compas it had 360 degrees, not 8 sides. Would love a example of this compas system since i have no clue what you are referring to. I also cannot remember the last time i was limited to 8 directions of movement in real life so not sure what is more natural or realistic about 8 directions vs 6 directions.

Having no tactical warfare system is suicidal. Today in the gaming world, tactical passages of play is a must...GalCiv used to have it and was one of the strongest elements to GalCiv II. *please line up your 'New' design team and give them their last cigarette*

Galciv II did not have tactical combat and neither did galciv I as far as i know. The combat style of galciv II will be in this game in it's next iteration. Also not sure what is suicidal about no tactical combat because Civ 4 and Civ 5, arguably the most succesful/known 4x games, don't have it either.

Allot of the statistical presentation of information seems to be aimed at...children who just about handle percentages !!!!

I don't see how that will prevent you from doing statistical analysis and what not to min/max if that's your thing. I don't see a 10 year old optimizing adjacency bonuses either, while that is just basic percentages too.

Other then that: accessibility leads to more sales leads to more expansions/dlc, without necessarily removing depth.

We need a new Galactic Civ-game, not another stupid unstrategical strategy game where it's all about the tiresome tactical battles and fooling/exploiting the AI.

You that like it that way have loads of crap to choose from (AOW3 comes to my mind here for instance). We who want an epic game where real strategical choices matter and are central, we choose GalCiv; and that's final!

NB! And many like both of course, and are happy there are games out there with different design philosophies.

GalCiv III hex system of movement is really lacking realism - Almost all other TB games use the more popular 8 sided 'compass' movement/logistical system. I mean...we drive/walk/fly/sleep using that 'natural' directional system and it is soooo easily 'coded'.

???

Cyong_ looks at Cvilization. Hexagons....

Cyong_ looks a Pandora first contact. Hexagons....

Cyong_ looks at Heroes of Might and Magic. Hexagons.....

I am going to guess you are referring to an octagon shape in regards to 8 sided? Problem with the repeating tessellation of octogons is that they don't fit together perfectly. Just ask tile makers. Could you please provide an example game for us to look at?

Reply to EleventhStar - Well...you know well what I meant by 8 sided hex directional compass movement e.g (N, NE, E, SE, S, SW, W, NW) for gaming..I was being abstract and passionate - not obtuse. But you just wanted to be

Tactical warfare can be and has been done well in 4X games (see above) and can be an option for those who want it - I have not noticed any statements about GalCiv implying that its a purely a 'die hard TB game hex view/top down old style game' or shall we just get out our old D&D games !!!

Reply to Cyong_- Thank you for linking a 8 sided hex layout and you are right in saying it is difficult to implement that shape. But, since the hex board we see in GalCiv and other TB's is purely a visual aid. Stardock could use an overlay to hide the 6 pointed and hideous hex board and display the 'natural' translated 8 pointed hex compass movement, which looks smoother. And lets be honest - Space is more 4D than 2D but we can depict that with clever graphics in 2D !

Let me also stress I like GalCiv and have played it since it first begain - but I am also for change that shows obvious connection with new players and old ones that TB's can be inspiring and introduce new features and graphics in one game. It can be done.

I can't say enough how much I prefer the tactical combat cinematic sollution in GalCiv2 compared to tactical player controlled battles for this game. Luckily the developers won't change this, but rather improve on the GalCiv2 sollution.

In fantasy strategy RPG's I often like it the other way arround, but I'd love to see a grand strategy game with the GalCiv2 sollution here as well. A fantasy game with a huger priority on strategical gameplay, a true grand strategy fantasy game, and I think it will have to be done by either Stardock or Paradox to be truly great.

I know such a game excist (when it comes to battles), but that one lack alot in the empire building department (for instance when it comes to city building), and it lacks alot of what I want to see in a grand strategy in other departments as well. I'm talking about Dominions here.

I am amused that Drawnmix say octagonal maps are so easy and less than two hours later agrees it would be difficult to implement. Yet then implies it is just an overlay and implies it would be easy again! Also, calling him obtuse wasn't constructive at all.

No game can be all things to all people. They said TC won't be in, yet a handful cannot let it go.

To say the graphics look the same as GC2 is silly. There is much more detail and colors now. The older versions didn't have hexes. They may be able to do something about zig-zagging while moving, but for now there are bigger things on the plate.

The only major graphic update so far was on ships. Personally, until the combat viewer comes out, I don't care. I spend my time in the galactic map zoomed out, in the planet viewer, in the shipyard, etc. I don't know what their plans are for the map, planets, etc. They still look better when you zoom in than GalCiv2. There are only 8 months, so let's not panic over eye candy just yet.

So far all we have are the basics of planet building, research, war and economy. The next beta adds a lot of meat as does the one after.

Most 4x games have a similar look/feel through the various versions. Someone playing CIV V gets most of the game play automatically from playing all those past versions. They just have to learn about new features and design changes. Hex maps started a minor furball over there as well. Those that didn't like it, still lost. They aren't going to remap the game!

Right now, they are looking for bugs, suggestions and feedback on adjacency, ideology, balance, etc. They are not looking to rewrite core features or add new large ones.

At the end of the day, you have a major vote. Pay for the game and play it, or pass and buy something else. They SHOW you weekly in the dev journals what the game play is and where they are going. It isn't like they are hiding anything.

In Legendary Heroes, which is a 4x fantasy game, They did a reasonably good job of adding TC in that game. You do have the option to auto resolve. In every case where the fight is evenly matched YOU MUST USE TC and do it yourself or you will likely lose your units.

The issue in that game as it would be here, is near mid to late game having 8-15 combats each having to be resolved by hand would become very tedious at best.

I always like the Combat viewer concept. It allows me to see my shiny designs and how they worked in combat while I sat back and let commanders do the work. Gal Civ II did a good job. I expect the same for Gal Civ III. I also hope to see the difference in weaponry from standard researched arms vrs resource augmented ones. That being the ship that has augmented mass drivers I expect it to see a higher rate of fire and also a longer range upon engagement. Same case for beam weapons and ones disabling or leaching shields. I gotta see that!

Yeah. I think we can expect a huger degree of detail in the new combat cinematics. Will be exciting when we get to know more about what's planned. Personally I also can't wait to see small fighters from carrier modules in action.

Honestly that's why i haven't bought it. I liked and played gal civ II a lot and by that i mean A LOT lol.

But this one just doesn't seem to offer a large enough difference. the bulky UI with graphics from the '90s in the videos just kills it. i mean i look at the galaxy map and i see the same map, sure there are some differences here and there but they are minor. I haven't played it so i'm sure there are strides there that i'm not seeing that might make up for it. But i have a hard time getting past the just plain bulky horrible UI design. I mean if i'm going to pay $50 for a game and sit in front of it for hours i'd want it to be somewhat more modern looking then something out of the original doom games.

I think i'll save my money and get civilization beyond earth when it comes out instead. At least then my units can move in a straight line instead of like some drunk person chasing a fly.

Reply to EleventhStar - Well...you know well what I meant by 8 sided hex directional compass movement e.g (N, NE, E, SE, S, SW, W, NW) for gaming..I was being abstract and passionate - not obtuse. But you just wanted to be

While i expected you meant 8 directional movement and/or a square grid, i have never heard it described with words like compass and natural. But seeing as i haven't played many tactical combat based games like might and magic, i was wondering if i was missing out on some terminology.

I also really cannot understand why 8 (or 6 for that matter) directional movement feels natural. I'd say you need at least 16 but preferably 24 or 32 directions of movement in a plane to get a passable approximation of natural. But that is besides the point.

In regards to stuff like the interface not changing much... as far as I'm concerned, if it's not broke, don't fix it.

In regards to the way ships move around the map? Actually, i've always thought that it does look a little funny (when you send them on a curved course, for example), but I don't know how easy it would be to change it, or if a change would rally look better.

In regards to 8 directions being natural... last game I can think of like that was Civ 4, and when 5 changed to hexes, I thought that felt more natural, to be honest. And I think the majority of the people here agree... (or don't have a preference).

Also, I expect Beyond Earth to have people running in funny lines along the hexes, just like I believe Civ 5 does....

I've played GC1+2 for years and will probably be still playing it (GC2 ToA) when most people are playing GC3 (need new comp) and from watching the dev stream and lets play vids on Youtube GC3 in Beta is a better game than GC2!

I'm not gonna list the improvements GC3 has over GC2 But take it from someone whose played GC2 for over 6 years and will probably be playing it long after GC3 has been released and gone on budget sale that This is a better game than GC2!

I suggest all these nay sayers actually play GC2 DL then play DA then ToA and notice the vast differences between them and then look again at GC3 in BETA!

You idiots want a newer updated Gal Civ game and when your getting one which is superior in every respect you then try to change it into something completely different or just trash talk it!

We seem to get these you MUST have a 3d starmap threads cropping up every 2 or 3 weeks, as always the majority on here disagree and as always the op and one or two others inist they are right and as always I will point out they have no plans to change fundementals like that so if you dont like it dont buy it.

As for it looking like gc2 its already a lot better and if you play the beta and then play gc2 you will see that but stylistic it is reminiscent of gc2 which is why people say this and some of those early alpha shots are not as the game looks now.

Wow! I must have the wrong game... mine says 'BETA - For Testing Purposes Only' across the top.

I realize that you cannot create a game that will satisfy everyone. I don't think that's what they are trying to do. I do think they are satisfying their fans, and drawing in some new ones! I've read through the posts before this one. Some interesting thoughts and opinions. Some should have been kept out.

I never had a chance to play GalCiv1. But I spent years playing GalCiv2. I love it. I'm not an on-line MMO player. I like single player epic turn based games. I know, it's just me. GalCiv2 was awesome, for me. I've had GalCiv3 BETA for a few days now. I'm 771 moves into a large game. Frankly, the graphics are awesome (twinkling lights on planets, animations linking planets & Starbases, etc...), the sounds are better, more options (though not all are active yet), and the list goes on. In no way is this the 'same game' as GalCiv2. It is the same 'type' of game. But so much better!!

I'm probably showing my age...I like turn based games. Grew up with them. The hex map works good for me. I don't mind the 'zig-zag' at all. I understand what's going on.

What I do not like is a game that is so 'over the top' with fantastic graphics and player interaction and a gazillion controls that by the time you figure out what to do, you're dead. I've tried a few of the epic space games out, like SinsOASE, and the interface and controls just get to confusing. Again, it may just be me. I for one am having a BLAST playing GalCiv3 and cannot wait for the next release. I am not looking for a completely realistic in every way simulation game. I am looking for the next generation turn based epic game that is FUN to play!!

Wow! I must have the wrong game... mine says 'BETA - For Testing Purposes Only' across the top.

I realize that you cannot create a game that will satisfy everyone. I don't think that's what they are trying to do. I do think they are satisfying their fans, and drawing in some new ones! I've read through the posts before this one. Some interesting thoughts and opinions. Some should have been kept out.

I never had a chance to play GalCiv1. But I spent years playing GalCiv2. I love it. I'm not an on-line MMO player. I like single player epic turn based games. I know, it's just me. GalCiv2 was awesome, for me. I've had GalCiv3 BETA for a few days now. I'm 771 moves into a large game. Frankly, the graphics are awesome (twinkling lights on planets, animations linking planets & Starbases, etc...), the sounds are better, more options (though not all are active yet), and the list goes on. In no way is this the 'same game' as GalCiv2. It is the same 'type' of game. But so much better!!

I'm probably showing my age...I like turn based games. Grew up with them. The hex map works good for me. I don't mind the 'zig-zag' at all. I understand what's going on.

What I do not like is a game that is so 'over the top' with fantastic graphics and player interaction and a gazillion controls that by the time you figure out what to do, you're dead. I've tried a few of the epic space games out, like SinsOASE, and the interface and controls just get to confusing. Again, it may just be me. I for one am having a BLAST playing GalCiv3 and cannot wait for the next release. I am not looking for a completely realistic in every way simulation game. I am looking for the next generation turn based epic game that is FUN to play!!

I think I've found it. Bring it on Stardock!!

lol thats awesome. Glad your enjoying the game. I might pick it up at some point when it's on sale or something on steam. I'm hoping they kick the bulky ugly interface by then.

A little uncalled for dude . Probably said in good jest, but, you know, tone and body language don't translate to text well.

And I'm very much looking forward to the game, in a more finished state. I found a few bugs and weird things so far, hopefully they will be fixed. . It's not bad right now, just needs more polish (the game play, primarily, not the graphics).